How many judgments cite Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India?

30 judgments on BharatTax cite Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India (247 ITR 274), spanning 2011 to 2024.

Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India

247 ITR 274Supreme Court of India2001#3931 most cited

What is Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India authority for?

An Assessing Officer cannot rely on a witness's statement for making additions to income unless the assessee is given an opportunity to cross-examine the witness, upholding the principle of natural justice.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India · principle of natural justice · cross-examination of witness · Assessing Officer · additions to income · section 131 · section 68 · section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 131 assistant commissioner undisclosed income search and seizure section 68 section 142(1)section 13 transfer person india total income business

Judgments citing Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

ITA 252/NAG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal

Section 131Section 143(2)Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.252/Nag./2018 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2, Nagpur v/s M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 7th Floor, Poonam Plaza, Palm Road ……………. Respondent Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 AABCN9937H Appellant by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Vikash Agrawal Date of Hearing – 06/11/2024 Date of Order – 06/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The appeal filed by the Revenue is against the impugned order dated 01/…

DY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX , CIRCLE -2, NAGPUR vs. M/S N KUMAR CONSTRUCTION CO .PVT.LTD , NAGPUR

ITA 247/NAG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Agrawal

Section 131Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.247/Nag./2018 (Assessment Year : 2010–11) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2, Nagpur v/s M/s. N. Kumar Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. 7th Floor, Poonam Plaza, Palm Road ……………. Respondent Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 AABCN9937H Appellant by : Shri Manoj G. Moryani Revenue by : Shri Vikas Agrawal Date of Hearing – 06/11/2024 Date of Order – 06/12/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the impugned order dated…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MYSORE vs. MR. SHORFF KRISHNARAJASETTY SATHEESHA, KODAGU

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 997/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 153ASection 153C

…ortunity to cross examine given to the A/R of the assessee on 02.03.2021 was an empty formality in as much as no cogent opportunity was afforded to the assessee. For this, reliance is placed on the following decisions: - Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India (247 ITR 274) (SC) - Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd Vs CIT (26 ITR 775) - CIT v. Odeon Builders (P.) Ltd. (418 ITR 315) (SC) - Andaman Timber Industries Ltd. v. CCE (62 taxmann.com 3) (SC) - CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. (421 ITR 686) (Bom HC) 12. For the reasons set out above therefore, it is thus submitted that the contentions put forth by the Ld. CIT, DR de…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SUR GEMS, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2078/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, CIT D.R

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 271

…essee and therefore their statements can not be relied to make addition as the same is against the principle of natural justice. M/s. Sur Gems In defence of his arguments the Ld. A.R. relied on the following decisions: Prakash Chandra Nahta v/s Union of India 247 ITR 274 (S.C.) Mehta Parikh & Co. v/s CIT 30 ITR 181 {S.C) M/s R.W. Promotions Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT (Bom) ITA NO. 1489 of 2013 dated 13/7/2015 18. The Ld. A.R. also submitted that since the books of accounts of the assessee were not rejected and no cross examination was allowed and therefore no addition or disallowance can be made as has been held in the c…

SUR GEMS ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1822/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agrawal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj, CIT D.R

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151Section 271

M/S. BHAGAWATI OXYGEN LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1474/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.1473&1474/Kol/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2015-16) Bhagawati Oxygen Ltd. Vs. Dcit, Circle-8(1), Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…Ashwani Gupta reported in 322 ITR 396 (Del) c) Decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs SMC Chare Brokers Ltd reported in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the material…

M/S. BHAGAWATI OXYGEN LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 8(1), KOLKATA

ITA 1473/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 133Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. JAY SHIVA EARTHMOVERS & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3995/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Feb 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishii.T.A. No. 3995/Del/2010 Ay: 2006-07 Ito, Ward 4(2), Vs. Jay Shiva Earthmovers & Construction Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 413A, Bu-60, Sfs Flats, Outer C.R. Building, Ring Road, Pitampura, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 85 New Delhi (Pan: Aabcj1414D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…be used against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is given to the assessee. It is against the principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India [2001] 247 ITR 274 in support of the proposition that cross-examination of the witness is must, before the A.O. relies on the statement of the witness for making addition. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the jurisdictional High Court i.e. Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Pradeep Kumar Gupta and Vijay Gupta(2008) 303 ITR 95(Delhi) wherei…

RAJDA POLYMERS,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-36, KOLKATA

In the result, this assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2414/KOL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Jan 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 16Section 35Section 35(1)(ii)

…shwani Gupta reported in 322 ITR 396 (Del) c) Decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case ofCIT vs SMC Chare Brokers Ltd reported in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court In the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprisesreported in 210 ITR 103 (Ca I) f) Decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the Id AO did not provide the mater…

RAJ KARAN DASSANI ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 36(1) , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 2346/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2346/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Raj Karan Dassani......………………..………………………....………………...…………………….….Appellant [Pan : Adnpd 8826 B] Ito, Ward - 36(1), Kolkata………............................................................…....….…………..…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appearing On Behalf Of The Appellant Shri Robin Choudhury, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appearing On Behalf Of The Respondent.

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 147Section 16Section 250Section 35(1)(ii)

ITO -13(3)(3), MUMBAI vs. VISHWA VYAPAR TRADING PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 2888/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri O.P. Meena, Hon'Blei.T.O. – 13(3)(3) V. M/S. Viswa Vyapar Trading Pvt. Ltd., 607, 6Th Floor, Central Plaza Room No. 227, 2Nd Floor, Daftari Road, Shivaji Chowk Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Malad (E), Mumbai - 400 097 Mumbai-400 020 Pan: Aadcv 9568 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal Department By : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

Section 133(6)Section 68

…bc used against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is given to the assessee, It is against the principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India 12001J 247 ITR 274 in support of the proposition that cross-examination of the witness is must, before the AO relies on the on the statement of the witness for making addition. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of nathu Rain Prcmchand v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 561, wherein the Hon'ble Court explained that it was the duty of the…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. HAPPY HOME CORPORATION,, SURAT

ITA 715/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

…ecome the hostile witness of the AO and thus, the statements of the depositors cannot be read without taking affidavits into consideration. This view is supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Prakashchahdra Nahta v. Union of India & Ors 247 ITR 274 which has been followed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of the said assessee as reported in 301 ITR 134. Further, similar view has also been taken by the ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of Hertz & Weaves Engineers (P) Ltd. v. ACIT 45 TTJ 290. Further, it is seen that the AO has rejected the affidavits of the depositors for the reason…

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, SURAT vs. M/S. HAPPY HOME CORPORATION,, SURAT

ITA 1991/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 68Section 80I

ACIT 30(3), MUMBAI vs. SHREEDHAM BUILDERS, MUMBAI

ITA 5589/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit-30(3), Shreedham Builders, R. No.510, 5Th Floor, 105/106, 1St Floor, बनाम/ Pratayakshkar Bhavan, Vijay Indl. Estate, Vs. Bandra Kurla Complex, Malad (W), Bandra (East), Mumbai-400064 Mumbai-400051 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Abdfs0133N

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 68

…c used against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is given to the assessee, It is against the principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon 'ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India 12001J 247 ITR 274 in support of the proposition that cross-examination of the witness is must, before the AO relies on the on the statement of the witness for making addition. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of nathu Rain Prcmchand v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 561, wherein the Hon'ble Court explained that it was the duty of the…

M/S. DELUX DIAMONDS,,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1),, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1396/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C .M. Garg & Shri O. P. Meena

Section 132(4)Section 143Section 148Section 234B

…failed to allow cross- examination as demanded by the assessee as mentioned in written submissions. Therefore, relying on the decision of Hon`ble Supreme Court in the case of Kishanchand Chelaram v. CIT 125 ITR 713 (SC) and Prakashchand Nahta v. UOI [2001] 247 ITR 274(SC) submitted that no Deluxe Diamond v. ITO Ward 1(3)(1)/I.T.A. No.1396/Ahd/2017/A.Y.07-08 Page 7 of 15 addition can be made without giving an opportunity of cross examination of the parties whose statement was relied upon by the AO. The ld. AR further submitted that the assessee has filed day-to-day quantity details of polished diamonds purc…

DHANSUKH RAWAJIBHAI PATEL,PALGHAR vs. ACIT PALGHAR, PALGHAR

In the result, appeal is on this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2802/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: D.T. Garasia & Shri N. K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Dhansukh Rawajibhai Acit Patel Palghar. Machhipada Sarawali, Vs. Po, Boisar, Tal & Po, Palghar - 401501 Pan: Abqpp9188B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 50C(1)Section 50cSection 80c

…in their respective returns. The learned AR relied upon the decision of Kishanchand Chellaram Vs. CIT [1980] 125 ITR 713, Ponkunnam Traders [83 ITR 508 & 102 ITR 366(Ker.], Prakash Chand Natha Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2008) 301 ITR 134 and P.C.Nahata [247 ITR 274 SC], S. Khader Khan Son [300 ITR 157 Madras] & Vinodkumar Solanki [233 ELT 157S.]. The learned AR relied upon the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Nagpur Vs. Kamlakar Moghe [2015] 64 taxmann.com 413. Learned AR relied upon the order of revenue authorities. 6. We have heard the ri…

RAJDA POLYMERS,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-36,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is assessee is allowed”

ITA 333/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 333/Kol/2017 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Rajda Polymers -Vs- Dcit, Circle-36, Kolkata [Pan: Aadfr 2816 C] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 12ASection 131Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 25Section 35(1)(ii)

…Ashwani Gupta reported in 322 ITR 396 (Del) c) Decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs SMC Chare Brokers Ltd reported in 288 ITR 345 (Del) d) Decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Chand Nahta vs Union of India reported in 247 ITR 274 (SC) e) Decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Eastern Commercial Enterprises reported in 210 ITR 103 (Cal) f) Decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of P.S.Abdul Majeed vs Agricultural Income Tax & Sales Tax Officer & Ors reported in 209 ITR 821 (Ker) 5.4. We find that the ld AO did not provide the materia…

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-5 vs. LAXMAN INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES LTD.

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/169/2017HC Delhi14 Mar 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 68

…sed against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is given to the assessee, It is against thc principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India l2001J 247 ITR 274 in Page 6 of 8 support of the proposition that cross-examination of the witness is must, before the AO relies on the on the statement of the witness for making addition. 'Reliance is also placed on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of nathu Ram Prcmchand v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 561, wherein the Hon'ble Court explained that i…

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MINDA INVESTMENT LTD., DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue as well as the

ITA 4391/DEL/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri J.S. Reddy & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, Sr. DR

Section 14ASection 68

…ssee cannot be used against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is to the assessee. It is against the principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the on of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India [2001] 247 ITR 274 in support of the proposition that cross-examination of the witness is must, before the A.O. relies on the statement of the witness for making addition. The assessee has the right to cross-examine if an assessing authority is relying on the testimony of a witness. The assessee is to be afforded an opportunity to cross-examine him as held in the c…

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. LAXMAN INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed granting relief of Rs

ITA 647/DEL/2010[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jun 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri J.S. Reddy

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, & Somil Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Sh. T. James Singson, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…ed against him unless until an opportunity of rebutting the same is given to the assessee. It is against the principle of natural justice. Reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Prakash Chand Nahta v. Union of India [2001] 247 ITR 274 in support of the proposition that cross- examination of the witness is must, before the A.O. relies on the statement of the witness for making addition. Reliance is also placed on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Nathu Ram Premchand v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 561, wherein the Hon'ble Court explained that it was the duty of the Ass…

Showing 1–20 of 30 · Page 1 of 2